Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home donate | Forums | FAQs | Contributions | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright | Contact | Volunteer Positions | Jobs | Bios
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or Staff Video-Cellar Date: November 28, 2009 03:39:57pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: What is a 'restoration' and is it grounds for ownership of PD materials?

I am heavily involved in the use, restoration and release of Public Domain films, even releasing otherwise "lost" films. This is my business.

In using public domain material, I understand that I have no legal basis to claim rights on the public domain content that I use. I can claim rights on new material I create (tinting, musical arrangements, pans and scans, etc) just not the original work, no matter how much painstaking work I have done. I have still only copied the original work and there is "no copyright in a copy of an expired work" (and the law is not grey on that).

I know that the minute I list my new transfer of X movie that I spent 6 months preparing I am opening it up to commercial exploitation. I can ask nicely for other people not to use it, but I can't enforce the request, so I don't bother asking. Ever major US PD distributor has 'borrowed' my work. It sometimes annoys me that I didn't get paid beyond the sale price of the DVD. But I just deal with it. It is the business I have chosen and thats just how it works. All I can do is undercut them or give the film away for free.

I agree with you that an individual's decision to use the product of a person's hard work is a matter of decency. But where there is no law to guide or enforce acceptable use, there is no way to control the use of your work. It is also a matter of decency whether or not the vendor misguides their customers as to the rights held in the work. Some legislation is made about this in the US and most other countries. It is usually referred to as "copyfraud." Its no more decent to misguide your customer into what legal rights you actually have as it is for them to exploit your work without credit.

Below is my standard disclaimer which attempts to be far more accurate in terms of the rights I hold in my DVDs and not to misguide my customers:

"Video Cellar DVDs are independent public domain releases. Our DVDs are made using the highest quality DVD recording media and are professionally mastered using the best available film prints. These DVDs are presented in a quality hard plastic DVD case with full colour insert. These items are sent cellophane wrapped.
We do not sell Bootlegs or counterfeit DVDs. We sell DVDs mastered with precision, care and quality from the best possible sources. We know you will enjoy viewing the classic films that we are making available through our DVD label and ebay store.
All of our films have been thoroughly researched and their public domain status has been determined. Our DVDs are produced in accordance with the Copyright Acts 1912, 1968 and Copyright (International Protection) Regulations (British films made available in accordance with Schedule 1.12(2)(e) of the UK Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988) from prints held by the Video Cellar archives. Enhanced images from the original public domain films or original public domain posters are used in cover art. Due to the age and archival nature of the film prints used, there may be some fluctuations in image and sound quality. Every care has been taken in transfering these decades old prints to DVD. Any minor imperfections present should not effect your enjoyment of the film.
Date of Publication: 1941-1943 Country: USA. Copyright not renewed. DVD released in Australia in accordance with Copyright (International Protection) Regulations. Any Trademarks used in this item listing are used for strictly descriptive purposes only. No association or endorsement is implied or inferred.
Cover Design, Menus, Artwork and Editorial content COPYRIGHT 2008 The Video Cellar, Australia."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cartoonsonfilm Date: November 28, 2009 04:26:31pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: What is a 'restoration' and is it grounds for ownership of PD materials?

Thank you for your wise insight, Video-Cellar. I completely agree with all the points you make. I must also mention that the explicit ownership wording was supplied to me by a third party while I was having my new website made. I am no web designer and did not control this aspect directly, and will see to it that it is changed. This wording was not on my former website which had been online since 2005.
But I do thank you for your comments on decency. I think we see eye to eye on this even though the explicit wording on my website is what seems to be part of the cause for this thread. I do not mean to mislead anyone and am simply looking to protect my work, maybe in more of a vocal manner than you are.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or Staff Video-Cellar Date: November 28, 2009 04:41:02pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: What is a 'restoration' and is it grounds for ownership of PD materials?

Thanks, It is nice to see other young people in this business and doing it the right way. So many people are just buying a mill creek 50 pack to start a PD DVD business these days.

I am 28 and have been collecting films since I was in high school. I started a DVD transfer business 5 years ago which morphed into the DVD label when I mastered DVD authoring.

If I can give one bit of advice. When your using "orphaned" works as opposed to PD works keep as much documentation as you can for your searches for copyright owners. This will be your main protection in the unlikely event that someone ever claims copyright on the film. And you should change your road show poster. Disney and WB are very precious about the use of their trademark cartoon characters. I got a letter from Disney when I had a dvd with a rare "Uncle Tom" cartoon which has some Mickey-like character modelling, claiming trademark infringement for the still on the cover. If you don't do what they ask they will keep you in legal paperwork forever.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cartoonsonfilm Date: November 28, 2009 04:57:40pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: What is a 'restoration' and is it grounds for ownership of PD materials?

Thanks for the kind words. Nowadays my poster only hangs in my home, I no longer use it when giving shows.

I have dealt with Disney's archive which bought some of my collections before obtaining their own film print materials of certain titles I have. Perhaps this has delayed their otherwise litigious nature.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: yofitofu Date: November 28, 2009 07:09:58pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: What is a 'restoration' and is it grounds for ownership of PD materials?

And I would say about "decency" that I had no idea what I considered an innocent question about PD and cartoonsonline would explode into these magnificent proportions, involving death threats, insults and accusations. I can appreciate what Mr. Stathe is doing. I just didn't like his legal wording. So I apologize for not just contacting cartoonsonline directly. I thank Video Cellar for his balanced words. Clearly there is some kind of giant PD DVD distribution business I was completely unaware of, and could have died for the cause.

Very strange group of people indeed.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cartoonsonfilm Date: November 28, 2009 07:14:38pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: What is a 'restoration' and is it grounds for ownership of PD materials?

Strange? Yes, in some ways. Though, the word strange only signifies unfamiliarity. Again, we both could have avoided headaches if you would have contacted me directly, as many have in the past for similar uses. Museums show my films and they have appeared for free at charitable events. My website has been revised now thanks to Video-Cellar's suggestions. What I will say though, is it's best to learn about a specific field by talking to the people operating in it rather than skirting the circles to start a conversation outside of the loop. This only invites assumption and uninformed voices.

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)